v/ 


.  .  if  \        ^^Ji  f-  V^ 

W 

^  •*.«-, v^Wc^   u  o^  •s.^.^iWe1   ... 


**' 

i£r  *•       f 


. 

r&JL 

'A, 

.!  f$r*-I 


U"      ^ 


& 


^f'^^f 
XAV* 


.2.*b.t 


^.ISsr*-  ,  v 

t-,r  ^   * 

~--.r~Tif     •  't\  -*t      "^f^s^    ,W  iirN      ^^-.So. 


'>:  '•£?  'W, 

i)     *V 

t'^BK  .  o&iV 

r  ^^^  A,  *^  V 


J* 


^ 


;;.w 


^5pf 


ISI     \W?  ,-..  yaCX 

t\^.        1  £<-  A 

--; 


#  -;^T /"^"v  .i« 


•:^ff 

#-- 

^Uk/ 


f, 


BROUGHT  FROM   ENGLAND. 


RICHARD    SEYMOR 

HARTFORD,  1640 


A    PAPER 


READ    BEFORE 


The  Connecticut  Chapter  Daughters 

of  Founders  and  Patriots 

of  America 

At  Norwalk,  Conn.,  February  i^th,  1903 


MRS.  MARlAyjWATSON  PINNEY 
Derfy,  Conn. 


THE    TUTTLE,    MOREHOUSE   4    TAYLOR    PRESS,    NEW    HAVEN 


RICHARD  SEYMOUR. 


MADAM  PRESIDENT  : — When  I  pledged  to  write 
what  I  had  gathered  from  tradition,  from  investiga- 
tion and  from  the  research  of  others,  relative  to 
Richard  Seymour,  I  did  not  understand  that  a  very 
competent  party  had  nearly  completed  the  geneal- 
ogy of  his  five  succeeding  generations,  although  I 
knew  it  had  been  discussed  for  twenty-five  years, 
but  I  supposed  its  publication  as  far  in  the  future 
as  ever. 

It  stands  without  question  that  a  genealogy  can 
not  be  published  without  funds,  and  while  the  time 
has  passed  since  the  work  has  been  in  preparation, 
several  parties  who  were  interested,  and  would 
probably  have  subscribed  for  more  than  one  copy, 
have  passed  "  the  dark  river,  which  has  never  been 
shadowed  by  a  homeward  sail,"  and  they  who  have 
spent  time  and  money  collecting  and  arranging 
material  for  the  book,  have  waited  for  funds  to 
publish. 

If  my  article  can  induce  any  person  who  inherits 
the  blood  of  Richard  Seymour  to  assist  in  this 
publication,  by  subscribing  for  the  same,  I  shall 
have  helped  forward  a  meritorious  work. 

There  being  in  the  near  future  a  probability  that 
two  or  three  volumes  of  genealogical  statistics  will 
be  published,  it  is  useless  for  me  in  a  paper  of 
thirty  minutes  to  refer  to  his  descendants. 


Who  was  Richard  Seymour  ?  who  came  to  Hart- 
ford in  1639/40,  and  was  one  of  the  signers  of  the 
agreement  for  planting  Norwalk  June  i9th,  1650, 
and  among  the  first  settlers  soon  af  ler.  He  died 
between  the  dates  July  29,  1655,  when  his  will 
was  made,  and  October  25,  1655,  when  the  court 
approved  the  inventory. 

He  mentions  in  his  will  his  wife  Mercy,  son 
Thomas,  and  three  other  sons,  namely :  John, 
Zachary  and  Richard,  who  being  under  age,  he 
left  to  their  mother's  guardianship. 

Mr.  Henry  W.  Seymour,  of  Washington,  D.  C., 
writes,  "  It  is  singular  that  the  wills  of  two  Richard 
Seymours  should  be  so  similar." 

One,  the  nuncupative  will  of  Richard  Seymour 
of  August  i6th,  1637,  and  buried  at  Berry-Pomeroy, 
County  of  Devon,  England,  which  says :  u  That 
lyttell  that  I  have,  I  will  leave  ytt  to  the  mother's 
disposinge,  the  Children  shall  be  under  the  mother, 
not  the  mother  them." 

Col.  Vivian,  in  his  History  or  "  Visitation  of 
Devon,"  states  :  I  think  it  reasonably  clear  that  Mr. 
Richard  Seymour,  son  of  William,  third  son  of  Sir 
Edward  Seymour,  and  who  married  Mary  Stretch- 
ley  at  Plimpton  St.  Mary,  May  26th  1626,  License 
granted  May  5th  1626,  was  buried  Aug.  1637,  as 
Elizabeth  (Seymour)  Gary  wife  of  Sir  George  Cary 
of  Cockington  declares  January  19th  1638,  that  Mr. 
Richard  Seymour's  inventory  was  taken  by  Henry 
Champernoune  of  Darlington  Esq.  Nicholas  Ball 
of  Tormohan,  merchant,  and  another,  Mr.  Richard 


—5— 

Seymour  leaving  one  son  Richard  who  was  never 
married,  and  was  buried  at  Cockington  August  26th 
1684,  also  there  were  three  daughters,  Amy,  Bridget 
and  Anne. 

Hart.  So.  "  Visitation  of  Devon,"  1620,  vol.  6, 
page  53,  says : 

Elizabeth  daughter  of  Gawain  Champernoune, 
Aunt  of  Henry  Champernoune  of  Dartington 
Esq.,  married  for  her  first  husband  a  Stretchley — 
which  may  indicate  a  reason  for  Henry  Champer- 
noune looking  after  the  interests  of  Mary  Stretchley 
the  widow  of  Richard  Seymour,  son  of  William 
Seymour,  and  grandson  of  Elizabeth  daughter  of 
Sir  Arthur  Campernoune  of  Dartington  Esq. 

And  again  the  Elizabeth  (Seymour)  Gary,  whose 
declaration  is  here  quoted,  was  sister  to  William 
Seymour,  father  of  this  Richard  Seymour,  and  her 
second  son  Robert  Gary,  married  for  his  first  wife 
Christin  daughter  and  heir  of  William  Stretchly 
esq. — Westcote's  "  Devonshire"  page  511. 

The  other  will  was  made  July  29, 1655,  eighteen 
years  after.  Richard  Seymour  of  Norwalk,  Con- 
necticut saying : 

"  I  doe  will  and  bequeath  unto  my  loving  wife, 
Mercy  Seymour,  my  whole  estate,  viz.  House  and 
lands,  cattle  and  movables,  except  small  personal 
value  of  property  to  Thomas  &c." 

He  gives,  on  reaching  twenty-one,  the  sum  of 
forty  pounds  to  John,  to  Zachary  and  Richard,  but 
the  control  was  in  the  mother. 

From  my  earliest  childhood   tales  of  ancestral 


greatness  were  inculcated,  which  in  the  unques- 
tioning credulity  of  youth,  were  accepted  without 
asking  for  proof  of  such  traditions. 

We  were  -  taught  to  believe  that  the  wife  of 
Richard  Seymour  was  Mary  or  Mercy  Rashleigh, 
and  that  the  marriage  was  recorded  at  Barnstaple 
in  the  north  of  County  Devon,  but  the  date  we 
knew  not.  I  have  photographs,  reversed  in  print- 
ing, of  two  rings,  which  have  been  handed  down 
in  the  family  of  Richard  Seymour's  son,  John  of 
Hartford.  Some  years  ago  another  descendant  had 
duplicates  made  for  his  own  keeping.  The  silver- 
smith who  did  the  making  said, '  that  the  Naval 
Officer's  ring  was  not  less  than  two  hundred  years 
old. 

The  Rashleighs  were  anciently  naval  men,  two 
of  the  family  circumnavigating  the  globe  with  Sir 
Francis  Drake. 

There  were  also  Naval  Officers  in  the  Seymour 
family. 

John — the  second  son  of  Sir  Edward  Seymour, 
and  who  married  Elizabeth  Slannyiige  of  Tam- 
merton  Folliet,  Oct.  25,  1629  (possibly  as  second 
wife  as  he  must  have  been  about  forty  years 
old) — was  in  1626  in  the  fleet  as  Captain  of  the 
ship  "Camelion."  Also  "in  1627  April  ist-3d 
*  Plymouth.'  Sir  Edward  Seymour  desires  that  his 
brother  Capt.  John  Seymour,  may  have  a  Good 
Ship  in  the  present  expedition."  And  several 
years  later  records  show  his  connection  with  the 
navy. 


SEYMOUR  ARMS  AND   RASHLEIGH  ARMS  COMBINED. 


RING-ACCORDS  WITH    RASHLEIGH   ARMS. 


THE   NAVAL   RING. 


— 7— 

But  these  suffice. 

The  other  ring  accords  with  "  The  Rashleigh 
Arms."  I  will  give  from  the  "  Visitation  of  Corn- 
wall," 1620,  vol.  9,  page  306,  "  Rashleigh-Quar- 
terly  sa-  a  cross  or.  between  a  Cornish  chough  Ar. 
beaked  and  legged  gu.  Ist  quarter ;  in  the  2d  quar- 
ter a  text  T.  of  the  third  3d  &  4th  a  crescent  of  the 
last,  on  the  cross  a  rose." 

Lyson's  Magna  Bretannia,  Devonshire,  vol.  vi, 
page  clxix,  "  Rashleigh  of  Rashleigh  Arms."  "Ar. 
a  cross,  sa.  in  chief,  two  text  T8  of  the  second." 

Can  there  be  question  about  placing  Richard 
Seymour's  wife  with  the  Rashleighs  ? 

Thomas  Rashleigh,  "  a  studyent,"  no  doubt 
meaning  in  theology,  was  May  8th,  1640,  admitted 
to  the  church  in  Boston,  and  we  learn  from  Lech- 
ford  that  in  1641  he  exercised  in  a  prophetical  way 
in  Gloucester,  and  there  perhaps  married,  but  his 
son  "  John,  being  six  weeks  old,  was  baptized  at 
Boston,  May  i8th,  1645." 

Savage's  Gen.  Diet.,  vol.  iii,  page  508,  says  he 
was  at  Bxeter  in  1646. 

Thomas  Rashleigh's  coming  to  New  England 
was  near  or  quite  the  same  time  that  Richard  Sey- 
mour came,  although  he  remained  at  or  near  Bos- 
ton, while  Richard  Seymour  located  in  Hartford. 
If  he  was  a  relative  of  Mercy  (or  Marey),  wife  of 
Richard  Seymour,  the  influence  of  the  mother  of 
six  weeks'  old  John,  who  returned  with  them  to 
England,  might  have  been  a  chain  to  keep  him  in 
that  locality  until  the  confusion  of  civil  war  had 


subsided,  when  he  returned  to  England,  and  was 
the  minister  at  Bishop-stoke,  County  Hants,  where 
May  4th,  1652,  he  baptized  Samuel  Sewell,  first  of 
that  name  Chief  Justice  of  Massachusetts,  and  who 
was  made  immortal  by  his  wife's  dowry  of  Pine 
Tree  shillings. 

The  relationship  of  Thomas  and  Mercy  Rash- 
leigh  is  conjecture,  but  family  tradition,  and  the 
presence  of  the  "  Rashleigh  Arms "  in  family 
relics  and  treasures,  is  unquestioned,  and  they 
came  not  there  by  accident. 

I  have  an  impression  in  wax  of  the  "  Seymour 
Arms,"  i.  e.  "  The  Wings,"  above  which  is  the 
Cornish  chough,  no  longer  in  flight,  but  resting 
with  the  Rashleigh  rose  in  its  beak,  showing  it 
had  found  a  home  in  connection  with  the  "  Seymour 
Arms." 

What  was  the  influence  which  moved  Richard 
Seymour  to  emigrate  in  1639/40  to  New  England  ? 

The  laws  of  entailment  giving  to  the  eldest  son 
from  generation  to  generation  the  estates.  The 
Church,  the  sea  or  a  military  life  was  the  vocation 
left  to  younger  sons,  who  had  too  much  spirit  to 
remain  a  dependant  upon  th'at  elder  and  more 
fortunate  relative. 

Although  a  brother  might  not  experience  the 
gall  of  dependence  in  sharing  what  was  his  father's, 
the  same  exemption  could  hardly  extend  to  the 
other  members  of  his  family. 

Let  us  look  back,  that  we  may  understand  what 
the  position  of  two  brothers  might  be,  both  inherit- 


ing  the  same  blood  and  spirit  of  their  common 
ancestors ;  the  accident  of  a  few  minutes,  months 
or  years  earlier  birth  entailing  control  to  the- 
favored  one. 

Sir  Bdward  Seymour,  Viscount  Beauchamp,  Karl 
of  Hertford,  and  later  Baron  Seymour,  of  Hache, 
and  Duke  of  Somerset,  in  1537  repudiated  his  first 
wife,  Lady  Catherine  Filliol,  daughter  and  heir  of 
Sir  William  Filliol,  of  Woodlands,  County  Dorset, 
and  Filliol-Hall  in  Essex,  that  he  might  take  to 
wife  Lady  Anne  Stanhope,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Woodstock,  Duke  of  Gloucester,  seventh  and 
youngest  son  of  King  Bdward  III. 

Lady  Catherine  had  then  been  twelve  years  his 
wife,  and  had  two  sons,  John  and  Bdward,  about 
ten  and  eleven  years  old. 

In  more  than  one  respect,  this  second  marriage, 
and  its  results,  were  not  unlike  that  of  a  certain 
Emperor  of  the  French. 

On  many  thrones  of  Europe  to-day  are  seated 
the  descendants  of  repudiated  Josephine,  through 
her  son  Eugene  Beauharnais. 

The  ducal  honors  of  Somerset  were  occupied  but 
a  short  period  by  the  descendants  of  Lady  Anne 
Stanhope :  ninety  years  after  the  attainder  of  the 
first  duke  was  removed,  her  male  line  became 
extinct,  and  the  honors  in  1750  reverted  to  the 
elder  branch,  the  line  of  Lady  Catherine  Filliol, 
ancestress  of  the  present  duke. 

Hay  ward  says  in  his  life  of  King  Edward  VI, 
"  Anne  Stanhope,  Duchess  of  Somerset,  was  for 


pride  monstrous,  a  woman  for  many  imperfections 
intolerable,  she  was  exceeding  violent,  and  subtle 
in  accomplishing  her  ends,  for  which  she  spurned 
all  respect  of  conscience  and  shame. 

This  woman  did  bear  such  invincible  hate  to 
the  Queen  Dowager,  first,  for  slight  causes  and 
woman's  quarrels,  and  especially  because  she, 
(Queen  Catherine)  had  precedence  over  her,  the 
wife  of  the  greatest  Peer  in  the  land." 

Referring  to  Lord  Sudeley's  disaffection,  subtle 
intrigues  and  underhanded  practices  of  providing 
arms  and  enlisting  men,  with  design  of  seizing  the 
King  and  assuming  the  reins  of  government  him- 
self, Collins  in  "  Peerage  of  England  "  says  :  "  The 
animosity  was  fomented  by  Anne  Duchess  of  Som- 
ersets being  obliged  to  yield  precedence  to  the  wife 
of  her  husbands  younger  brother." 

The  earl,  for  at  this  time  his  title  was  Barl  of 
Hertford,  having  become  brother-in-law  to  one 
King  and  uncle  to  his  successor  (his  sister,  Lady 
Jane  Seymour,  being  the  wife  of  King  Henry  VIII 
and  mother  of  his  only  son,  King  Hdward  VI),  his 
ambition  overcame  his  better  sense,  and  hastened 
calamitous  results.  ***** 

Why  were  the  Seymour's  at  Berry  Pomeroy  ? 

Lyson  in  his  "  Magna  Britannia  "  says  :  "  Berry 
Pomeroy  came  into  possession  of  the  Seymour's  by 
purchase  from  the  Crown." 

At  that  time  the  old  castle  was  simply  a  strong- 
hold, where  many  warriors  could  be  fed  and  en- 
camped. It  was  Catherine  Fillol's  grandson  who 


— II — 


built  the  Elizabethan  Palace,  after  he  had  married 
Elizabeth  Champernoune,  as  I  will  mention  later, 
and  which  was  the  residence  of  the  Seymours  until 
brought  to  destruction  by  civil  war,  then  the  family 
removed  to  May  den  Bradley. 

Sir  Thomas  Pomeroy,  the  last  of  that  family  at 
Berry  Pomeroy  in  1549,  was  a  Catholic,  and  one  of 
the  leaders  in  a  rebellion  which  assumed  serious 
proportions,  having  mustered  ten  thousand  men, 
who  demanded  that  mass  be  restored,  which  riot 
was  put  down  by  Lord  Russell,  the  leaders  sent  to 
London,  where  they  were  tried,  and  many  executed, 
their  forfeited  estates  reverting  to  the  Crown. 

At  that  time,  in  1549,  according  to  Lyson,  the 
Duke  of  Somerset  was  in  the  Tower  of  London, 
having  been  arrested  on  charge  of  treason,  but  after 
five  months  imprisonment  was  acquitted,  although 
less  than  three  years  after  was  found  guilty  of 
felony  and  beheaded. 

About  1550  the  Duke  purchased  Berry-Pomeroy 
and  bestowed  it  upon  the  children  of  his  first  wife, 
perhaps  that  they  be  as  far  as  practicable  removed 
from  his  second  wife  and  her  family.  Or  it  might 
have  resulted  from  admiration  of  his  elder  son 
Edward,  who  Sept.  loth,  1547,  was  with  his  father 
in  the  "  Battle  of  Musselbourgh  "  and  for  valor  there, 
having  had  his  horse  killed  under  him,  received  the 
order  of  knighthood. 

Be  that  as  it  may,  from  that  time  the  home  of 
the  elder  branch  was  at  Berry-Pomeroy. 

John  the  eldest  son,  by  his  last  will,  dated  Dec. 


— 12 — 


7th,  1552,  after  bequeathing  legacies  to  his  servants, 
concludes  in  these  words  :  "  also  I  make  my  Brother, 
Sir  Edward  Seymour  the  elder,  my  full  executor 
and  I  give  him  all  my  lands  and  goods  that  are- 
unbequeathed.  He  to  paie  and  discharge  all  my 
debts." 

The  probate  bears  date  April  26th,  1553. 

Sir  Bdward  Seymour,  Knt.,  of  Berry  Pomeroy, 
County  of  Devon,  obtained  in  the  7th  year  of  King 
Edward  VI  (i.  e.  1553)  an  act  of  Parliament  restor- 
ing him  in  blood,  to  enable  him  to  enjoy  lands  that 
might  subsequently  come  to  him  from  any  collateral 
ancestor,  and  describing  him  as  Edward  Seymour, 
the  eldest  son  of  Edward,  first  Duke  of  Somerset, 
John  the  first  son  having  died  early  in  that  year 


He  had  a  grant  from  the  King  dated  at  Ely  Sept. 
6th,  1553,  "of  the  Lordships  and  manors  of  Wal- 
ton, Shedder  and  Stowey,  the  Park  of  Stowey,  and 
the  hundred  of  Water-stock,  in  County  Somerset, 
with  the  appurtenances,  to  him  and  his  heirs  for- 
ever, lately  the  possessions  of  his  Father,  Edward 
Duke  of  Somerset." 

From  his  father's  death  to  that  time  there  had 
been  no  provision  made  for  him.  He  lived  retired 
without  concern  in  public  affairs,  excepting  being 
Sheriff  of  the  Count}'1  of  Devon  and  other  offices 
suiting  his  degree.  He  married  Mary  Walsh, 
daughter  and  heiress  of  John  Walsh,  Esq.,  Justice 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  &c. 

He  died  May  6th,  1593,  as  is  evident  from  the 


—13— 

inquisition  taken  after  his  death,  at  Totness  on 
September  2oth,  1593,  wherein  he  has  the  titles  of 
Knight  and  Lord  Seymour,  and  died  seized  of  the 
castle  and  honor  of  Bury,  and  Bury-Pomeroy  and 
Bridgetown  in  Pomeroy,  with  the  advowson  of  the 
church  at  Bury  :  the  castle  and  honor  of  Totness 
and  manor  of  Totness  ;  the  manors  of  Cornworthy, 
Lodeswell,  Huise,  Monnockenzeale,  Losebear,  a 
fourth  part  of  the  hundred  of  Hayborre,  the  seite 
of  the  monastery  of  Torr,  and  divers  other  lands 
of  Devonshire ;  the  manor  and  Lordship  of  Mayden- 
Bradley  in  County  Wilts,  and  divers  other  lands, 
and  a  capital  messuage  called  the  Lord  Chayne 
House  in  London,  within  the  precincts  of  Black- 
friars,  near  Ludgate.  To  all  of  which  his  son 
Kdward  was  heir,  and  at  that  time  upwards  of  thirty 
years  of  age. 

Which  Edward  Seymour,  while  his  father  was 
yet  living  in  1592,  was  chosen  one  of  the  Knights 
for  County  Devon.  Also  returned  to  Parliament 
in  1600,  and  to  the  first  Parliament  of  King  James. 

He  was  made  Baronet  June  29th,  1611.  Sept. 
3oth,  1576,  he  married  at  Dartington  Hlizabeth 
Champernoune,  daughter  of  Sir  Arthur  Champer- 
noune  of  Dartington,  County  of  Devon,  Knight, 
a  lady  whose  lineage,  being  a  descendant  of  Lady 
Elizabeth  Plantagenet,  daughter  of  Eleanor  of 
Castile  and  King  Edward  I,  was  fully  equal  to  that 
of  Lady  Stanhope,  for  whom  the  first  Duke  of 
Somerset  repudiated  Lady  Catharine  Filliol,  her 
husband's  grandmother. 


—14— 

They  had  eleven  children.  This  Sir  Edward 
commenced  the  dwelling  house  within  the  quad- 
rangle of  the  Castle  of  Berry-Pomeroy,  with  its 
grand  staircase,  fine  fret-work  and  mullioned  win- 
dows, of  which  it  is  recorded  there  were  so  many 
"  that  it  was  a  good  day's  work  for  a  servant  to 
open  and  close  the  casements,"  the  cost  of  which 
exceeded  twenty  thousand  pounds  ($100,000.00). 
All  is  now  buried  in  its  own  ruin. 

Collins  in  "Peerage  of  England,"  page  171, 
says  :  "  This  castle  at  Berry  was  a  great  and  noble 
structure,  but  in  those  times  of  confusion  during 
the  Civil  Wars  in  the  reign  of  Charles  I  was 
demolished  and  now  lies  in  ruin." 

Also  at  the  bottom  of  page  172  and  top  of  page 
173  says :  "  For  adhering  to  his  Sovereign  in  the 
times  of  the  Rebellion,  he  had  his  house  at  Berry 
Castle  in  Devon  plundered  and  burnt." 

[This,  recorded  by  Collins,  relates  to  events 
which  occurred  after  the  death  of  this  Sir  Edward, 
but  during  the  life  of  his  son  and  successor.  It  is 
inserted  here  as  connected  with  the  fate  of  Berry 
Castle,  its  construction  and  destruction.] 

Sir  Edward  (Lord  Seymour)  died  April  nth, 
1613,  and  was  buried  with  great  solemnity  in  the 
church  at  Berry-Pomeroy,  where  he  has  a  noble 
monument,  Sir  Edward  Seymour,  the  eldest  son, 
succeeding  him  in  titles  and  estates. 

May  22d,  1603,  ten  years  before  the  death  of  his 
father,  he  had  been  knighted  at  Greenwich. 

He  was  sent  by  King  James  I  on  an  embassy  to 


y  J« 

Denmark,  was  elected  one  of  the  Knights  of  Devon- 
shire in  two  Parliaments,  and  for  Killington  and 
Totness  in  two  other  Parliaments.  Also  by  the 
appointment  of  Charles  I  in  the  last,  which  met  in 
Westminster. 

But  on  the  dissolution  thereof  he  retired  to  the 
Castle  of  Berry-Pomeroy,  which  had  been  made  a 
stately  House.  He  had  by  Dorothy,  his  lady, 
daughter  of  Sir  Henry  Killigrew,  of  Lathbury,  in 
Cornwall,  Knight,  six  sons  and  five  daughters. 

He  died  October  5th,  1659. 

Hoare  says,  Lady  Dorothy  Seymour,  his  wife, 
was  buried  at  Berry-Pomeroy,  June  3oth,  1643. 

I  will  now  follow  with  the  other  children  of  Sir 
Edward  and  Elizabeth  (Champernoune)  Seymour, 
who  were  married  at  Dartington,  County  Devon, 
Sept.  30th,  1576. 

Bridget  was  baptized  at  Dartington,  Dec.  ist, 
1577.  She  married  Sir  John  Bruen,  of  Aldeharnps- 
ton,  and  was  buried  at  Aldehampston. 

Mary  was  born  1579.  Married  Sir  George  Fare- 
well, of  Hill  Bishop,  County  Somerset,  Knight. 

Edward,  first  son,  married  about  1604,  Dorothy, 
daughter  of  Sir  Henry  Killigrew,  of  Lathbury- 
Cornwall,  Knight  (before  narrated).  Their  daugh- 
ter Elizabeth,  supposed  to  be  the  eldest  daughter, 
was  baptized  May  22d,  1606. 

John,  second  son  (so  recorded  in  Mill's  Pedigrees 
of  Devonshire  families,  1753),  married  Oct.  25th, 
1629,  Elizabeth  Slannyng,  sister  of  Richard  and 
Nicholas  Slannyng,  of  Tammerton  Folliet  (perhaps 
as  second  wife).  Marriage  license  at  Exeter. 


Hoare's  History  of  Wiltshire  says  he  died  at 
Halwell,  Archdeaconry  of  Totness,  in  1670. 

He  was  certainly  living  in  1639,  and  even  in 
1650,  for  at  that  time,  John  Seymour,  of  Stoken- 
harn,  County  Devon,  Bsq.,  was  delinquent,  as  he 
adhered  to  the  forces  raised  against  the  Parlia- 
ment. 

He  petitioned,  May  3oth,  1649,  stating  he  had 
property  in  Halwell,  Devon,  on  which  he  was  fined 
at  a  sixth  viz.  ^105. 

August  i6th,  1626 — "  York  House  "  "  Bucking- 
ham to  Commissioners  of  Navy — Capt.  John  Sey- 
mour having  been  employed  in  the  late  fleet  as 
Captain  of  the  "  Camelion  "  is  recommended  for 
payment,  after  the  rate  of  28  &  6d  per  diem." 

April  ist~3d,  1627  "  Plymouth  " — Sir  James 
Bagg  to  Nicholas.  Further  enforces  the  points  in 
his  letter  to  the  Duke. 

Sir  Bdward  Seymour  begs  that  his  brother  Capt. 
John  Seymour  may  have  a  good  ship  in  the  present 
expedition. 

1638/39  "  Certificate  by  John  Seymour  Lieuten- 
ant Colonel  of  Sir  Bdward  Seymour's  Regiment " 
"  That  Thomas  Serle  of  Burferris,  County  Devon, 
cited  before  the  Council  for  not  providing  arms  at 
the  last  muster,  together  with  his  son-in-law  John 
Pyne  Clerk,  had  accorded  to  provide  what  arms 
should  be  impossed  on  them,  for  their  tenement  in 
Tamerton  Folliet. 

January  i9th,  1639,  "  Tamerton — Certificate  of 
John  Seymour  Deputy  Lieutenant  of  Devon,  that 


Henry  Pollexsen,  William  Cholwick,  Allen  Belfield 
and  Richard  Lapp,  all  of  County  Devon,  had  prom- 
ised to  find  such  arms  as  should  be  enjoined  them." 
(And  others  of  succeeding  dates.)  Communicated 
by  Rev.  F.  G.  Lee,  Vicar  of  All  Saints,  Lambeth, 
transmitted  by  the  Hon.  Henry  W.  Seymour  of 
Washington,  D.  C.  "  Miscellanea  Genealogica  et 
Heraldiare,"  vol.  iii,  page  373.  New  series  1880, 
by  J.  J.  Howard.  No.  n,  Pedigree  of  Withey  of 
Berry-Norbet  and  Westminster. 

Mary,  daughter  of  John  Seymour  of  Berry-Poin- 
eroy,  and  niece  of  Sir  Bdward  Seymour  of  that 
house,  married  Robert  Withey  of  Berry-Norbet, 
who  died  in  1669,  and  was  buried  at  St.  Mary's, 
Westminster. 

William,  the  third  son,  married  June  8th,  1602, 
Joan,  daughter  of  John  Young  of  Saltash,  Corn- 
wall. 

From  the  burial  register  of  Plympton  St.  Mary 
is  this  entry,  "  Mastr  William  Seamer  Gent,  of  the 
House  of  Bearie-Castle,  in  the  pyshe  of  Berie 
Pomrie,  was  buried  in  ye  Pyche  Church  of  Plymton 
Erie,  the  xxx  day  of  Jannarie  1621."  He  evidently 
lived  at  Plympton. 

Col.  Vivian,  in  his  "  History  or  Visitation  of 
Devon,"  states  that  William,  the  third  son  of  Sir 
Bdward  Seymour,  had  a  son  Richard,  who  married 
Mary  Stretchley  at  Plympton  St.  Mary,  May  2Oth, 
1626.  (See  marriage  register.)  The  licence  was 
granted  May  5,  1626. 

He  was  buried  August,  1637.     They  had  three 


—IB- 
daughters,    Amy,    Bridget   and  Anne,  and  a  son, 
Richard,  who  died  unmarried,  and  was  buried  at 
Cockington  August  26th,  1684. 

Declaration  of  Blizabeth  (Seymour)  Gary,  wife 
of  George  Gary  of  Cockington,  Devon,  dated  Jan- 
uary iQth,  1638,  states  that  Mr.  Richard  Seymour's 
inventory  was  taken  by  Henry  Champernoune  of 
Dartington  Bsq.  (allied  by  blood  to  both  Seymour 
and  Stretchley),  Nicholas  Ball  of  Tormohan,  mer- 
chant, and  another. 

Blizabeth,  third  daughter  of  Sir  Bdward  and 
Blizabeth  (Champernoune)  Seymour,  married  Sir 
George  Gary  of  Cockington,  in  County  Devon, 
Bsq.  Sir  George  Gary's  will  proven  May  2  2d,  1617. 

"  Mathew  Hatch  made  declaration  that  Blizabeth 
Gary,  the  relict  of  George  Gary  of  Cockington,  and 
mother  of  Henry  Gary  of  Cockington,  in  Devon, 
Knight,  and  sometimes  called  Blizabeth  Seymour, 
also  mother  of  Robert  (of  whom  Westcote's  Devon- 
shire, page  511,  states,  married  Christin,  daughter 
and  heir  of  Wm  Stretchley,  Bsq.)  also  mother  of 
Bdward,  John,  Theodore,  George,  Walter  and 
James,  sons,  and  Frances,  Blizabeth  and  Bridget, 
daughters  of  the  above  George  and  Blizabeth,  were 
all  living  and  in  good  health." 

This  is  dated  June  i5th,  1646. 

Ann  married  Bdmund  Parker  of  North  Moulton, 
in  County  Devon,  Bsq. 

There  were  two  children,  who  died  in  infancy. 

Walter,  the  fourth  son.  Collins,  in  "  Peerage  of 
Bngland,"  names  him  as  fourth  son.  Also  Hoare's 
"  History  of  Wiltshire  "  places  him  as  fourth  son. 


—19— 

Hon.  Henry  W.  Seymour  of  Washington,  D.  C., 
sends  the  following: 

"  Historical  Manuscripts  Commission,  ist  Report, 
Appendix,  part  vii." 

Manuscripts  of  Duke  of  Somerset. 

Marquis  of  Ailesbury  and  Rev.  Sir  T.  H.  G. 
Paleston,  Bart.,  page  58.  "Walter  Seymour  to  Philip 
Richards  at  Maiden  -  Bradley,  1607,  Oct.  i9th, 
entreats  him  to  further  his  request  as  necessity 
enforces,  for  10  £  this  quarter."  "  You  know 
against  Christmas  I  shall  have  more  occasion  to 

bestow  money  than  at  any  other  time 

I  am  so  much  indebted  as  my  exhibition  will  not 
extend  so  far  as  to  pay  it.  Wherefore  I  thought 
it  better  to  once  again  trouble  you,  than  to  be  in- 
debted to  the  merchants. 

The  matter  is  not  great,  I  must  confess,  but  yet 
I  would  not  willingly  have  any  left  unpaid,  which 
would  be  a  great  discredit. 

My  father  sent  me  word  he  would  increase  my 
exhibition  when  I  proceeded  Bachelor.  Wherefore 
I  am  sure  he  will  not  deny  so  small  a  sum  in  the 
meantime. 

Postscript — If  you  have  an  intent  to  send  your 
son  unto  Oxford,  either  before  Christmas  or  imme- 
diately after,  I  can  easily  provide  him  a  place." 

Date  of  the  above  is  Oct.  i9th,  1607. 

One  year  later — "  Oxf.  Hist.  Soc.,  vol.  xii,  page 
281." 

"  Seymour — Walter,  B.A.,  from  Exeter  College, 
26th  Oct.  1608. 


— 20 


"Seymour — Walter,  M. A.  4th  June,  1611." 
Degrees. 

From  the  MSS.  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  Oxford, 
M.S.  Top.  Devon.  C.  14,  p.  212. 

Exeter:  Seymour-Walter;  adm.  B.A.  26  Oct., 
1608,  det.  1608/9:  lie.  M. A.  4  June,  i6n,inc.  1611. 

The  monument  in  Berry-Pomeroy  Church  shows 
five  sons  of  mature  age,  four  daughters  and  also 
two  infants. 

Westcote's  "  Devonshire  "  says  :  "  In  the  north 
aisle  of  St.  Mary,  Parish  Church  of  Berry-Pomeroy, 
is  a  noble  monument  erected  to  the  memory  of  the 
Seymours,"  underneath  which  are  cut  out  in  stone 
the  proportions  of  their  eleven  children. 

It  would  seem  from  this  that  Edward,  John, 
William,  Walter  and  Richard  were  men  of  mature 
age,  but  of  Walter's  marriage  or  death  I  know  of 
no  record  except  a  legend  that  he  perished  in  one 
of  the  Parliamentary  battles,  of  which  we  have  no 
proof. 

Richard,  the  fifth  or  youngest  son,  was  born  in 
1596,  as  the  records  at  Exeter  College,  Oxford, 
"  founded  in  1314  by  Walter  D.  Stapleton,  Bishop 
of  Exeter,"  state :  "  Seymour-Richard,  of  Devon, 
Bart.  fil.  Exeter  Coll.,  matriculated  5  Feb.  1613 
aged  17  years  fifth  son  of  Sir  Edward  Seymour." 

Also  Register  of  Exeter  College,  Oxford,  edited 
by  C.  W.  Boase  ;  Oxf.  Hist.  Soc.  xxvii,  page  279. 

College  Plate, 
White  plate ;   Card  pots. 

"  Exdono    Richardi    Seymour,    hujus    collegii 


MONUMENT  IN   BERRY-POM  EROY  CHURCH. 


21  — 


cominensalis  et  fillii  Bdwardi  Seymour,  Baronetti, 
143/4  oz." 

After  this  gift  of  plate  (14  3/4  oz.)  when  he  was 
recorded  as  Richard  Seymour  son  of  Edward  Sey- 
mour Baronet,  (not  as  son  of  the  late  Baronet)  it 
would  make  it  seem  to  have  been  soon  after  his 
matriculation,  as  his  father  died  early  that  year 
(i.  e.  April  nth,  1613)  after  which  we  find  no  later 
record  of  him  at  Oxford. 

We  have  no  evidence  that  he  graduated. 

Collins,  before  1714,  states,  Richard,  fifth  son  of 
Sir  Edward  Seymour,  married  Miss  —  -  Rash- 
leigh. 

Hoare's  History  of  Wiltshire  states,  "  Richard, 
fifth  son  of  Sir  Edward  Seymour,  was  born  in  1596, 
as  the  Records  at  Exeter  College  indicate,  but  do 
not  show  that  he  graduated." 

From  what  I  can  learn  : — 

Bridget  was  baptized  December  ist,  .1577. 

Mary  born  1579. 

Elizabeth  was  living  in  1646. 

Edward  died  October  5th,  1659. 

William  died  January  3oth,  1621. 

John  died  1670. 

Ann  married  Edmund  Parker. 

Walter 

-Richard  was  born  in  1596. 

f  And   our   ancestor,   Richard   Seymour,  died  in 
1655 — between  July  29th,  1655  and  Oct.  25th,  1655. 

As  I  have  enumerated,  the  Seymour  estates  were 
many. 


— 22 — 


Collins  says  that  at  that  time  the  Seymours  were 
the  most  powerful  family,  of  largest  fortune  and 
extensive  influence  of  any  of  the  commons  in  the 
west  of  England. 

The  eldest  son,  and  inheritor  of  these  estates, 
had  five  daughters  and  six  sons,  now  arrived  at 
mature  years.  Collins  says  the  eldest  son,  born  in 
1610,  was  Vice  Admiral  of  the  County  of  Devon, 
taking  an  active  part  in  the  army. 

The  second  son,  Henry,  born  in  1612,  was  Page 
of  Honor  to  his  Majesty  Charles  I,  and  was  a  gen- 
tleman valued  and  esteemed  by  persons  of  the 
greatest  note,  and  on  the  eruption  of  the  civil  wars, 
went  with  the  Marquis  of  Hertford  into  Somerset- 
shire, etc.,  courageously  withstanding  the  whole 
force  of  the  Earl  of  Bedford,  etc. 

The  country  was  now  in  the  throes  of  civil  war, 
the  head  of  the  house  supporting  the  cause  of  his 
sovereign.  Charles  first  began  his  reign  March 
27th,  1625,  governing  without  Parliament  from 
1629  to  1640,  meeting  the  expenses  of  the  govern- 
ment by  forced  loans  and  other  extraordinary 
means. 

He  was  executed  at  Whitehall  January  3oth, 
1649. 

Unless  Richard  Seymour's  sympathies  were  in 
concord  with  his  influential  relatives,  what  could 
be  better  than  that  he  seek  a  home  in  the  new 
country,  where  many  friends  had  preceded  ? 

The  Seymours  being  strong  adherents  of  the 
Established  Church,  suffered  alike  from  the  Cath- 
olics and  Presbyterians. 


—23— 

St.  Mary,  the  parish  church  of  Berry-Pomeroy, 
was  plundered  of  its  monumental  brasses  and 
burned,  its  register  destroyed,  and  although  the 
edifice  has  been  restored,  there  is  no  register  ante- 
dating 1602. 

As  the  Seymours  at  that  date  had  been  located 
there  over  fifty  years,  it  is  to  their  serious  disad- 
vantage, that  being  one  reason  why  it  is  so  difficult 
to  prove  the  date  of  marriages,  baptisms,  and 
burials,  previous  to  1602. 

The  probating  of  wills  at  Totness,  Bodmin  and 
Exeter  assist,  but  minors  and  people  without 
estates  do  not  always  make  wills ;  children  offend- 
ing by  objectionable  alliances  are  not  always  men- 
tioned in  a  will.  As  a  consequence  if  the  church 
records  of  marriages,  baptisms  and  burials  are  lost, 
it  is  an  irreparable  injury. 

In  the  wars  between  Charles  I  and  Parliament, 
Sir  Edward  Seymour,  the  head  of  the  house,  for 
his  adherence  to  his  sovereign,  and  supporting 
episcopacy,  endured  many  hardships. 

His  beautiful  Elizabethan  dwelling  within  the 
quadrangle  of  the  Castle  at  Berry-Pomeroy  was 
plundered  and  burned,  and  now  lies  a  ruin.  Not 
only  was  the  castle  and  palace  destroyed,  but  its 
records  perished,  and  that  to  the  descendants  seems 
the  greater  loss,  for  in  the  muniment-room  (about 
nine  feet  in  width  and  eleven  feet  long,  leading  by 
a  few  stairs  from  the  guard-room),  where  were 
kept  the  castle-record  of  births,  with  names  of  their 
sponsors,  of  marriages,  by  whom  bestowed,  amount 


—24— 

of  dower  or  marriage  portion,  deaths,  and  who 
were  the  chief  mourners ;  of  charters,  seals,  deeds, 
copies  of  wills,  and  events  of  importance,  all  there, 
from  generation  to  generation,  and  cannot  be 
replaced. 

In  1639/40  there  was  no  prospect  of  the  elder 
branch  of  the  family  inheriting  the  ducal  honors 
and  dignities,  therefore  but  little  use  in  a  new 
country  of  ancestral  parade  *  *  *  *. 

Why  was  the  tradition,  which  has  come  down 
through  these  years,  that  Richard  Seymour  was  of 
the  family  of  the  Karl  of  Hertford  instead  of  the 
Somersets  ? 

Let  me  answer.  The  attainder  of  the  first  Duke 
of  Somerset  was  not  removed  until  1660,  twenty 
years  after  Richard  Seymour  came  to  Connecticut, 
five  years  after  he  was  laid  to  his  final  rest  in  the 
old  Colonial  Cemetery  at  Norwalk. 

Elizabeth,  in  the  first  year  of  her  reign,  before 
her  coronation  (1558),  created  Bdward,  the  eldest 
son  of  Lady  Anne  Stanhope,  Karl  of  Hertford  and 
Baron  Beauchamp,which  were  honors  enjoyed  by  his 
father  before  he  was  made  Duke  of  Somerset,  and 
for  which  titles  and  honors  a  private  act  was  passed 
May  25th,  1540,  "  whereby  all  titles  and  honors 
were  specially  entailed  on  the  issue  of  his  second 
marriage." 

When  Richard  Seymour  came  to  New  England 
and  during  the  remainder  of  his  life,  the  head  of 
the  house  of  Seymour  was  the  Karl  of  Hertford. 

The  natural  sequence,  particularly  at  the  time  of 


—25— 

burial,  would  be  for  companions  and  friends  to  refer 
to  him  as  of  the  family  of  the  Earl  of  Hertford. 

Think  you  such  reference  would  not  sink  into 
the  memories  of  sons  10,  12  and  14  years  of  age? 
When  connected  with  a  father  who  was  dead,  even 
if  Thomas,  who  had  been  married  one  year  and 
ten  months  when  his  father,  Richard  Seymour,  died, 
did  not  choose  to  comment,  would  they  not  repeat 
it  from  father  to  child,  and  thus  bring  it  down 
through  the  years  ? 

What  have  we  to  sustain  the  tradition  of  our 
grandsires,  that  Richard  Seymour  descended  from 
a  Knight,  who  taking  the  name  of  St.  Maur  from 
the  place  of  his  birth  in  Normandy,  as  was  an 
ancient  custom,  entered  Hngland  with  William  the 
Conqueror,  and  assisted  in  establishing  his  claim 
over  those  of  Harold,  as  successor  to  "  Hdward  the 
Confessor,"  and  in  the  battle  of  Senlac,  otherwise 
known  as  Hastings,  overthrew  Harold. 

The  family  of  St.  Maur  were  early  located  in 
Monmouthshire,  as  the  learned  Camden  and  other 
genealogists  agree.  The  name  was  anciently  writ- 
ten St.  Maur,  and  in  old  Latin  records  D.  S.  Mauro. 

For  Camden  says :  "  Roger  de  St.  Mauro  lived 
in  the  reign  of  Henry  I  (i.  e.  1 100).  Almerius  de 
St.  Mauro  was  Master  of  the  order  of  Knight  Tem- 
plars, and  Milo  de  St.  Maur  was  one  of  the  Barons 
of  the  realm,  in  the  reign  of  King  John  (i.  e.,  1179) 
as  his  descendants  were,  till  the  reign  of  Henry 
V"  (14130 

The  earliest  and  most  certain  information  con- 


—26— 

cerning  the  family  and  the  place  of  their  residence, 
Camden  gives  in  his  "  Britannia  in  Monmouth- 
shire "  in  these  words  :  "  Not  far  from  Caldicot  are 
Woundy  and  Penhow,  the  seats  formerly  of  the 
illustrious  family  of  St.  Maur,  now  corruptly  called 
Seymour. 

We  find  that  about  the  year  1240,  in  order  to 
wrest  Woundy  out  of  the  hands  of  the  Welsh, 
Gilbert  Marshall,  Earl  of  Pembroke,  was  obliged 
to  assist  William  of  St.  Maur  Knt.  from  whom  was 
descended  Roger  of  St.  Maur,  Knight,  who  married 
one  of  the  heiresses  of  the  illustrious  John  Beau- 
champ,  the  noble  Baron  of  Hache,  who  was  de- 
scended from  Sibyl,  one  of  the  co-heiresses  of  the 
most  puissant  William  Marshall,  Earl  of  Pembroke, 
and  from  William  Ferrars,  Earl  of  Derby,  Hugh  de 
Vivonia  and  William  Mallet,  men  of  eminent  worth 
in  their  time. 

The  nobility  of  all  which,  as  also  several  others, 
have  concentred  in  the  Right  Honorable  Edward  de 
St.  Maur,  or  Seimer,  now  Earl  of  Hertford,  a 
singular  encourager  of  vertue  and  learning,  for 
which  qualification  he  is  deservedly  famous." 

From  Camden's  "  Britannia  in  Monmouthshire," 
column  2,  page  597,  by  William  Camden  Clar- 
enceaux,  who  died  in  1623,  aged  73  :  "  This  book 
was  newly  translated  into  English  with  additions 
and  improvements.  London,  1695." 

From  Collins'  "Peerage  of  England":  "Sir 
Roger  de  St.  Mauro  was  son  and  heir  of  Sir  Will- 
iam de  St.  Maur  (for  Vincent  assures  us  that  he 
was  a  knight). 


—27— 

The  church  of  Penhow  was  dedicated  to  St. 
Maur.  The  Park  was  called  by  their  name,  and 
likewise  here  at  Penhow  they  had  their  castle, 
which  continued  in  the  family  until  the  time  of 
Henry  VIII,  for  in  a  letter  of  the  Earl  of  Hertford 
to  Sir  John  Thynne  (whose  grandmother  was  a 
Seymour,  and  the  family  bore  the  '  Seymour 
arms,'  she  inheriting  Penhow),  and  Roger  St.  Maur 
having  married  Cecelia,  one  of  the  daughters  and 
heiresses  of  John  Beauchamp,  Baron  of  Hache,  etc., 
in  County  Somerset,  added  to  his  fortunes  as  well 
as  the  dignity  of  his  family,  and  this  was  the  cause 
of  their  removal  into  Somersetshire  to  their  very 
great  advantage." 

The  Earl  of  Hertford  asked  of  Sir  John  Thynne 
"  To  be  informed  to  whom  his  grandfather  had 
sold  Seymour  castle  in  Wales  ?" 

Sir  Roger  de  St.  Mauro  was  lord  of  the  manor 
of  Woundy  in  the  time  of  Henry  III  (1216)  and  a 
grant  to  Thomas  Elliot  of  a  messuage  of  the  chapel 
at  Woundy ;  his  seal  appendant  was  a  pair  of  wings 
circumscribed  "  Sigill  Rogeri  de  Seimer."  This  Sir 
Roger  died  before  the  28th  year  of  King  Edward  I 
(i.  e.  1299).  I  have  a  copy  of  these  arms,  taken 
from  a  window  of  the  old  church  at  Penhow. 

A  genealogist  who  has  made  a  study  of  this, 
suggests  that  the  name  u  Penhow,"  may  be  an 
outcome  of  the  St.  Maur  coat  of  arms,  as  "  Penna  " 
means  "  wing." 

When  Richard  Seymour  came  to  New  England 
in  1639/40,  he  brought  some  things  which  verify 


traditions.  Anciently  but  a  small  proportion  of 
the  people  could  write  their  names,  even  if  they 
could  read.  Therefore,  from  early  times  every 
family  had  as  sign-manual  a  "  coat  of  arms,  or 
"  seal,"  to  be  used  by  way  of  authentication  or 
security. 

The  "  seal"  which  Richard  Seymour  brought 
with  him  to  New  Hngland,  which  he  used,  as  well 
as  did  his  immediate  successors,  on  wills  and  busi- 
ness papers,  is  still  in  the  keeping  of  one  branch 
of  the  family  of  Richard's  son,  John  Seymour  of 
Hartford,  and  is  identical  with  that  used  six  hun- 
dred years  ago  by  Sir  Roger  Seinier  of  "  Penhow  " 
in  Monmouthshire. 

I  have  a  photograph  of  an  impression  from  that 
seal. 

The  seal  was  used  on  a  will  in  1765,  in  1798  and 
again  in  1829. 

An  excerpt  from  the  will  of  Thjomja^Sej^iour, 
on  which  that  seal  was  used,  dated  Dec.  28th,  1798  : 

Item — "As  I  have  already  given  to  my  eldest 
son  Thomas  Y.  Seymour  by  deed  of  gift  and  other- 
wise, his  full  portion  of  my  estate,  in  which  he  ex- 
presses himself  contented,  so  I  give  him  nothing 
further,  except  '  my  silver  seal,'  bearing  the  Family 
Arms,  which  was  his  grandfather  Seymour's." 

Which  arms  are  the  "  St.  Maur  wings,  tips 
downwards  conjoined  in  lure" — the  same  as  gener- 
ation after  generation  have  used  for  seven  hundred 
years. 

I  have  a  photograph  of  a  coat  of  arms  which  was 
brought  from  England. 


\   \ 

'"«*         \  \ 


THE   SEAL— THE   SAME  AS  USED  AT   PENHOW  IN    1393. 


—29— 

The  original  is  in  the  keeping  of  a  descendant 
of  Richard  Seymour's  second  son  John.  It  is  prop- 
erly colored,  which  does  not  make  itself  evident  in 
a  photograph. 

Underneath  the  "  coat  of  arms  "  is  "  He  beareth 
Gules,  a  pair  of  wings  inverted  and  conjoyned 
Or,"  by  the  name  of  Seymour. 

This  is  a  copy  of  the  original  formerly  belong- 
ing to  Henry  Seymour,  son  of  Thomas  (1735), 
the  first  mayor  of  Hartford,  which  Thomas  had 
the  original ;  it  is  now  in  New  Orleans,  but  still 
in  the  possession  of  a  descendant  of  John  Sey- 
mour, the  son  of  Richard. 

I  have  referred  to  the  two  rings  which  are  pre- 
served by  descendants  of  John  Seymour,  who  must 
have  clothed  these  several  relics  of  bygone  days 
with  a  degree  of  sacredness,  or  they  would  not  be 
in  evidence  to-day. 

One  ring  is  the  ring  of  a  naval  officer.  Was  it 
Seymour  ?  or  was  it  Rashleigh  ? 

The  other  ring  accords  with  the  Rashleigh  arms, 
and  admits  of  no  doubt  but  that  it  was  once  the 
ring  of  Richard  Seymour's  wife. 

Charles  J.  Seymour,  a  descendant  of  John,  second 
son  of  Richard  Seymour,  now  past  middle  age  and 
living  near  Boston,  has  in  his  possession  by  inher- 
itance a  Bishop's  Bible,  black  letter,  edition  1584, 
which  he  guards  with  devotion. 

It  is  in  the  vault  of  a  bank,  and  the  credentials 
of  any  one  requesting  sight  of  it  must  be  without 
spot  or  blemish.  I  have  not  seen  the  Bible,  but  a 


—30— 

friend,  a  descendant  of  John,  son  of  Richard  Sey- 
mour, has  had  a  careful  examination  of  it,  and  says  : 
"  I  believe  the  Bible  published  in  1584  was  inher- 
ited by  John,  the  second  son  of  Richard  Seymour, 
and  that  Richard  was  in  Hartford  in  1640,  as  the 
Bible  states." 

The  minute  statement,  "  Richard  Seymor  of 
Bery-Pomery,  Heytor  hund.  in  ye  Com.  Devon, 
His  Booke  "  indicates  that  Bery-Pomery  was  his 
birthplace  or  residence,  and  that  the  Bible  was  his 
book. 

In  the  inventory  of  the  estate  of  his  son  John 
of  Hartford,  we  find  a  great  Bible  10  shillings. 

That  a  man  who  had  matriculated  at  an  Oxford 
College  should,  when  in  his  sixtieth  year  and  near 
death,  sign  his  will  with  his  mark,  indicates  physi- 
cal weakness,  and  that  he  did  not  mention  this 
Bible  in  that  will,  cannot  count  against  its  having 
belonged  to  Richard  Seymour,  for  with  the  excep- 
tion of  a  few  specified  articles  to  his  son  Thomas, 
all  else  was  given  to  his  loving  wife  as  well  as  care 
of  his  three  sons  under  age,  who,  at  the  age  of 
twenty- one  years  were  each  to  receive  forty  pounds. 

In  the  inventory  of  Richard  Seymour's  estate, 
appraised  by  Matthew  Campfield  and  Richard  Olm- 
stead,  we  find :  Item — Books,  one  poimd,  which, 
without  doubt,  included  this  Bible. 

[In  the  inventory  of  his  son  John's  estate  we 
find — one  Great  Bible,  10  shillings^ 

From  this  Bible — I  have  three  photographs  :  on 
the  reverse  of  the  title  page  is  a  pen  and  ink 


SEYMOUR  COAT  OF  ARMS, 
With  Augmentations  granted  by   Henry  VIII   in   1536. 


sketch  of  the  "  Seymour  coat  of  arms,"  as  used 
by  the  Karl  of  Hertford,  with  the  augmentations 
granted  by  Henry  VIII  in  1536  to  the  family  of 
Jane  Seymour,  his  third  wife. 

J.  Howard,  in  his  "  Peerage  and  Family  History," 
on  page  40,  referring  to  the  augmentations  granted 
to  Howard,  after  the  victory  at  Flodden,  and  death 
on  the  field  of  the  King  of  Scots,  says :  "The  dif- 
ference between  a  grant  to  a  man  and  his  heirs 
and  a  grant  to  all  his  race,  is  well  seen  in  the  case 
of  the  Seymour  augmentations,  (August  i5th, 
1547),  which  was  granted  not  only  to  the  Duke  of 
Somerset  and  his  heirs,  but  also  *  Omnibus  posteris 
suis  totique  familie.'  : 

Which  coat  of  arms  and  augmentations  were — 
Quarterly,  ist  and  4th  between  six  fleur-de-lis, 
three  lions  of  Bngland,  2d  and  3d.  The  paternal 
coat  of  Seymour,  i.  e.  "  two  wings  conjoined  in 
lure,  tips  downward,"  "  crest,"  "  a  Phoenix  in  flames 
with  wings  expanded."  Which  crest  was  a  badge 
in  memory  of  King  Edward  VI,  as  it  was  on  the 
banner  carried  by  -his  grandfather,  Sir  John  Sey- 
mour, the  father  of  Queen  Jane  Seymour,  in  the 
wars  in  France  and  Flanders;  also  in  1520,  when 
he  attended  King  Henry  VIII  at  the  great  inter- 
view with  Francis  the  French  King,  called  the 
"  Field  of  the  Cloth  of  Gold,"  having  in  his  retinue 
one  chaplain,  eleven  servants  and  eight  led  horses. 

Also  at  the  second  interview  at  Boulogne  in  1532. 


—32— 
Beneath  this  Coat  of  Arms  is  this  device : 

' '  Foy  pour  devoir  ' ' 

RICHARD   SEYMOR   OF   BERY   POMERY 
HEYTOR   HUND.    IN   Y*  COM    DEVON 

hi/  Booke. 

Hartford  ye  Collony  of  Connecticot 

in  Newe  England  Annoque  Domini 

1640 

The  second  photograph  is  the  title-page  to  the 
New  Testament  of  a  Bishop's  Bible,  black  letter 
edition  1584.  At  the  bottom  of  this  page,  in  a 
panel,  is  a  pen  and  ink  sketch  of  the  Seymour 
arms,  i.  e.  "  the  wings  conjoined  in  lure,  tips  down- 
wards." The  same  as  were  used  by  the  D.  St. 
Mauro  at  Penhow  in  1393,  and  always  in  the 
Somerset  quarterings. 

G.  W.  Bve  in  "  Decorative  Heraldry,"  page  37, 
says :  "  The  '  Phoenix '  was  the  Banner  of  Sir 
John  Semer  in  the  sixteenth  century,"  and  "  the 
colors  of  his  standard  were  Azure  with  the  Back 
of  the  Wings  Or." 

The  original  "  crest "  was  on  a  wreath,  a  "  pair 
of  wings  conjoined  and  crowned." 

The  third  photograph  is  the  first  chapter  of 
Matthew  in  this  Bishop's  Bible,  black  letter,  edition 

1584. 

In   the   inventory    of   John    Seymour's    estate 


—33— 

(second  son  of  Richard)  is  u  a  Great  Bible,  10  shil- 
lings." The  will  was  dated  Dec.  loth,  1712. 

If  Richard  Seymour's  home  had  not  been  at 
Berry  Pomeroy  before  he  came  to  New  England, 
would  this  Bible  with  this  record  have  been  left  to 
stand  without  explanation  ? 

Did  not  the  sons  of  Richard  know  the  truth  from 
their  parents'  lips  ?  and  ^Thomas  must  have  been 
at  least  seven  years  old  wlien  he  left  BnglaricT^and 
would  have  disabused  their  minds  if  not  correct. 

Knowing  the  truth,  they  would  never  have 
assumed  that  to  which  they  were  not  entitled,  for 
they  were  men  of  honor. 

MARIA  WATSON  PINNEY, 

No.  116  Derby  Avenue, 

Derby,  Conn. 


In  the  first  place  I  wish  to  acknowledge  the  great 
assistance  of  the  Hon.  Henry  W.  Seymour  of 
Washington,  D.  C.,  without  which  this  narrative  of 
connected  incidents  could  never  have  appeared. 

Also  to  the  courtesy  and  assistance  of  Mr.  Chas. 
Iy.  N.  Camp  of  New  Haven  I  am  greatly  indebted. 

Authorities  used  are : 

Camden's  "  Britannia  in  Monmouthshire." 
Ly son's  Magna  Britannia,  Devonshire. 
Col.  Vivian's  Visitation  of  Devonshire. 
Westcote's  Devonshire. 
Mill's  Pedigrees  of  Devonshire  Families. 


-34- 

Hartley  Society's  Visitation  of  Devonshire. 

Hoare's  Visitation  of  Devonshire,  Wiltshire  and  Cornwall. 

Collins'  "  Peerage  of  England." 

Hay  ward's  Life  of  Edward  VI. 

J.  J.  Howard's  "  Peerage  and  Family  History." 

J.  J.  Howard's  Pedigree  of  Berry-Norbet  and  West- 
minster. 

G.  W.  Eve,  "  Decorative  Heraldry." 

Savage's  Geneal.  Diet. 

Miscellanea  Genealogica  et  Heraldiare  Manuscripts. 

Church  Register  of  Marriages  and  Burials,  St.  Mary 
Plympton,  Devonshire. 

Court  Records,  Totness,  Bodmin  and  Exeter. 

Oxford  Hist.  Soc. — Exeter  College  and  Bodleian  Library. 

Family  Legends — Seymour  Bible,  the  Wills  and  Inven- 
tories of  Richard,  John  and  Thomas  Seymour. 

Declarations  of  Elizabeth  Seymour  Gary  and  Matthew 
Hatch. 


>rf  l»" 


T-  —y,,, 

^£&         " 


'  e     ^rlSR 
j 


28 


il 


^^% 


*    •*]  ^.  r-.^*     ' 'f  r  v^  ;^^      -'I T 

•'•^•"'>P' 

vi^ 


A    000109345     9 
____.___. 


Vj^' 


Ki&>  *7Pn 

->  ^v7  t 


•f-fr 

r- 

- 

;  & 


'*  -"N 

,, 


_2»>      •* '  Up  f^M'tf-        ,  ^?T»      «f '  V-  r 

*Y      ^T^V  ^  ,  ^  f      ^5^S  ^ 

^4i^/  ^  ^vl^r^  .^^  <^  7«V !V* 

JK  *>\f  t^1?*^ 


